Legal Opinion
United States v. Plascencia
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided July 23, 2008No. 05-11169PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REAVLEY, Circuit Judge:
Federal prisoner Joel Plascencia appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which was determined to be time-barred. We conclude that Plascencia’s conviction became final when the time expired to file a timely notice of appeal on direct review and that Plascencia is not entitled to the benefit of the 90-day period for seeking certiorari, after dismissal following denial of a Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4) motion, when determining § 2255’s limitation period. We therefore AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.
I
Plascencia pleaded guilty to conspiracy…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Houston v. LackSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Clay v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Eberhart v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Jose Evaristo Reyes-Requena v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Michael Kapral v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- United States v. GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. Mario DuranCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2019
- United States v. David ScruggsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
- Mark v. ThalerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. ReddCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.